Talk:New World War/@comment-38782524-20191017214753/@comment-61.94.198.126-20191202052308
The usage of Battleships are basically non existent due to WW2 Air Superiority, but it did not mean that it won't work in this kind of era where its AA would overmatch any kind of Aircrafts, the amount of AA Defense would simply be far too much for any massive bombardments with the amount of escorts in mind. Aircraft Carriers, Missiles and such are far more expensive to maintain compared to the shells. Oh sure, there might be an explosion accident, but it won't be as crippling as the loss of an Aircraft or Steam Catapult that Japan had not gotten their hands on. The Battleship might be an outdated thing in the OTL, but here it's perfect due to the advanced tech of AA Guns. Or if not Battleships, Heavy Cruisers, something with better and meaner guns than 127mm cannons. Missiles are far too expensive in this kind of battle. Even with missiles, the Battleship can still tank a lot of them, missiles are used on mostly soft targets and Battleship cannons will be able to overmatch them. That is the advantage and the fact that Japan only possess little landing ships, they'd need to mellow the defenses like in Pearl Harbor, and they don't have many Bombers to bomb the defenses. That's a problem with how many fighter jets that aren't capable of travelling the distance. They'd need refuel, otherwise they won't make it to the mainland. The Total fuel can only be used half by half due to the nature of going and returning. Japan doesn't have any forms of a specifically engineered bomber like America's B-52 or B-2 Spirit Bombers. That is a massive disadvantage against the Gra Valkas Empire. They don't have long ranged aircrafts that are capable of doing much damage to the shore defenses. Japan's F-2 might have missiles, but those missiles would never be able to damage the forts that much with how many that are lying around and with how many AAs placed around them. Even Quality cannot overmatch Quantity in some situations. The landings would still be devastating like D-Day where Battleships and Bombers were present. The bombers themselves might still be dropping bombs too inland to effect the forts. Makeshift forts are a thing. Trenches are a thing. No one said that World War Two weapons cannot kill a soldier thus the invasion would be a bloodbath with many Japanese lives lost. A nuke would solve this as the Americans had. America did not want to use the nuke, but looking otherwise at the Japanese stubborn wish to continue fighting, teeth to nail, civilians or soldiers, they will win, but in the cost of millions of lives. This would mean Japan to use a specifically developed bomber or missile to nuke Gra Valkas(a few times if need be) for them to see how hopeless they are. And before anyone says it. Japan has never been specified to have F-35Cs or F-35Bs, whichever had the VTOL capability to land on their Helicopter Destroyers. Meaning they can only send in Helicopters and their ships still rely on oil and not a nuclear generator like the 7th US Fleet's Nuclear Carrier. This would mean that if they get a foothold, then they might be able to capture a landing strip and renovate them to hold fighter jets, until then, biplans of the Mu's Marin or their newer Shinden Monoplanes would be able to work the magic of air superiority. Missiles. Aircrafts are way too overplayed. Overrated. Battleships with Railguns are far more cheaper compared to a Carrier that needs to be filled by Carrier-based aircrafts that might be lost. With the railguns, the Battleships would also have less chance of exploding due to misfire or citadel strikes. Something that would be devastating for a normal Battleship. Guns are cheaper. They are far more numerous. Easier to produce in the long run. Missiles are way too expensive and can be lessened to have more materials given to other needs of better weapons. Bombers if they must. More funds can be relieved from missiles that won't be used so much due to their expensive nature. And due to that, Japan should have relieved cash from that department to have some other useful thing such as steam catapults, carrier-based aircrafts if they still want to play by their hurr-durr Air Superiority is better kind of play, but Battleships are nearly ageless in this place with nothing to oppose them except torpedoes, which would be something that can be dealt with if given enought time. But that itself is hard without missile-torpedoes that are launched and dropped into the ocean. Destroyers will never be able to survive the onslaught of 127mm cannons that the Modern Destroyers have. Torpedo Bombers would be shredded by Jet Fighters and AA guns as well as Surface-to-Air Missiles which are still expensive but useful nonetheless against threatening aircrafts. That is a take of what I think would be a far better strategy of basically defeating Gra Valkas, retracting funds from missiles, but not completely and the fact that Aircrafts are overplayed and the US 7th Fleet would only give out advices and even then they aren't technicians or designers of the damn thing. So, it'd be a limited amount of knowledge, but would be very useful in training the pilots of the prototype carrier-based aircrafts which would be similar to F-18s or maybe F-14s or something like the F-4 as they are once used by Carriers, but very much too big and eats up too much space on the carrier. The carrier would take a long time and even then would need to be retrofitted from time to time due to their ever advancing aircrafts and the expensive magnetic catapult upgrade if they ever get there, while Battleships would be ageless with no Aircrafts that would be able to threaten it. As I said again. Tl;dr, Japan with enough weapons controls the airspace by AA and Missiles, Battleships would be by far ageless without any oppositions such as enemy 3rd to 4th Gen Jet Fighters against them, Aircraft Carriers would be by far too expensive to develop with carrier-based aircrafts to go with them as well as training and accidents that tend to happen overtime, while electromagnetic catapults are a viable project, a railgun would simply project a force compareable and would have less chances of exploding. In the End, Japan would dominate via AA and Missiles and could use them in dangerous situations like the Rowlian Fleet engagement where Missiles don't even come into play with their 127mm cannons being enough for finishing them off. A Mirishial Battleship cannot maintain balance with an older A6M Zero Fighter lookalike, not to mention barely hold their ground against Fuso, Kongou-era Battleships. What chances do they have against a possibly better armed and equipped Yamato, if not a Battleship then a Monitor Ship(Battleship guns, weaker hull) would be more than viable and less expensive, but coming to the nature of how Battleships can tend to score a lucky blow, a Battleship is much more useful in armor comparison.